Three CCD's usually makes a HUGE difference in image quality. That's a big thing.

Motor noise can often be handled by mounting a small shotgun mike on the camera shoe (around 50-70$) and pluging it into the mike input (assuming that the panasonic has such an input). This can also solve other problems with the built-in mike.

Amount of zoom isn't as important as whether the zoom is variable speed (you push the button down hard, and it zooms fast).

The fact that canon's only support firewire basic (at least I think that's the case with all canon's) would make me go Panasonic. If you ever going to use FCE or FCP you'll want full firewire support.

umm... 3CCD Cams are by no means native to Panasonic. The AGDVC7 is a Panny with only one CCD. The Canon XL2 and GL2 among others have 3CCDs. Pretty much anything in the prosumer level or higher should have 3 CCD's

The reason that having 3 CCDs (or Charged Coupled Device) is so important is because this allows your cam to record the red, green, and blue channels separately, this way you dont lose resolution on them. The image is much better. Also, the larger the CCD, the better (1/3" is better than 1/4").

Zoom depends on the lens. if you buy body only (and purchase the lens and viewfinder separately) you can use any compatable lens, unless the particular cam has a dedicated lens that cannot be removed,

Light sensitivity depends highly on the lens, as well as any adapters, filters, etc you have on the cam. Take note of the f-stop number on the lens.

I dont think that its possible to say that either one is better or worse. It also depends on the situation. For instance, anything from the Canon ELURA series is going to get owned by something like the DVC7, DVC30, etc. But the Canon GL2 would easily take on the DVC7. The Panny DVX100 beats the GL2, and the Canon XL2 is obviously better than the DVX100. And of course, if you feel like spending 35,000 on a cam, go and buy a DigiBeta system .

What I meant earlier by depending on the situation... well Ive heard that the DVC7, even though its 1CCD, perfores almost as well as a digital Betacam in high-light (outdoors, bright day) environments. Also, if you dont want to spend thousands of dollars on a tripod and jib arm, but still want very dramatic angles, you'll need a cam thats nice and light, so that a cheap jib and tripod can handle it. If you want to make a film-style movie, you want a cam that can do 24p frame rate. In the case of a filmlike movie, you'll also want to consider what kind of telecine pulldown method you want. What about widescreen? Can the cam record in 16:9 aspect ratio without doing a hard matte? Will you need to spend another thousand on an anamorphic converter? These are all things the XL2 is capable of. I think the DVX can do non-hard matte widescreen, but I dont know about 24p framerate. Most cams are stuck at 30i.

Typically, prosumer level Pannys cost less than prosumer level Canons, but the Canons are generally more professional, and dont cover the lower end of the prosumer end of the spectrum.

If you want to go a little better than consumer, go with the Panny. If you want to do quasi-professional but still affordable, go with the Canon. Thats just my two cents.

oh, and regarding ism's post... the computer interface (im assuming he means this for capturing) is the least of my worries when buying a cam. As long as its the look I want, i say, hell i'll wait as long as I need to to capture....

The Froogle site has a few C-NET camera reviews.

http://froogle.google.com/froogle/r...c5552235ab11715

And DVX 100 or 100A both have 24p.

I looked around and found this low price. It might be good company or wise guys. I don't know. You check it out first. But $1,600 for Dvx 100 is VERY good price.

http://www.usaphotonation.com/produ...roduct_id=10778

Date of Print: 5/8/2005

AG-DVX100A 1/3" 3-CCD 24P Mini-DV Camcorder (AG DVX100A, AGDVX100A)

The AG-DVX100 shattered conventional notions of what a DV camera-recorder could do, delivering image quality, functions and operating ease suitable for professional applications. As the first model in its class to offer the 24p/30p Cinema mode, the AG-DVX100 was particularly well received by filmmakers and image creators. Now, Panasonic introduces the AG-DVX100A. Availability:Yes

Our Price: $1,599.00

Yes, when I said the "Panasonic has 3 CCDs" I was speaking specifically about the PV-GS250 that I mentioned in my post, compared with Canon's Optura 60.

I'm not looking at pro-level cams, just consumer level cams below $1000. I'll probably just be using iMovie, not Final Cut. 24p is not an issue, although 16x9 mode would be nice since my next TV will probably be widescreen.

double post

Resolution in this case (as opposed to other features) seems to be the name of your game and that means the Panasonic PV-GS250 will give you better resolution with a Leica lens and 3.1 megapixels resolution than the Canon Optura 60 with 2.2 megapixels (although the Canon does have 16:9 aspect ratio). But, now that I look a bit further (in the B&H Photo catalog that came in yesterday's mail) I think the Panasonic might also have the better feature set as well.

Tough call. You wouldn't go wrong with either one, but I'd go with the Panasonic.

Although I would REALLY search around for the very best deal I could get on a AG-DVX100 or a 100A. Chances are you would NEVER outgrow it's capability, no matter who was watching the finished product they would NEVER find fault with the image quality and (this may seem a petty issue but it DOES sometimes mean the difference between landing a gig or not landing the gig) because the DVX100 is a true professional quality camera it just LOOKS more impressive than either of the other two.

Here is a link to an Ebay listing for the NON-24p version of the DVX100. It is the DVC80.

http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dl...7516084970&rd=1

Eynstyn: I wouldt go so far as to say that the DVX100 is a "true professional" cam. The ones that pros use in news and movies will run you upwards of 20,000 dollars. (were talking HD cams and digiBetas.) And in movies and such many dont even use digital, but traditional film. (Lets not even go there.)

Sure, pros use the DVX100, but it is still a prosumer level cam. Also, pros know how to use it properly. I used to work in a group that used a DVX100, and I saw how the Image could be good. But they didnt have any idea how or what the settings were. The white balance was always off, and frankly we had no reference by which to set it. If you want it to look pro, expect to invest in some white balance cards, color charts, filters etc. Even if youre using a consumer level cam, this is a good idea.

Basically berween the Optura and the GS250, I say go with the GS250. 3 CCDs is something you definiately want. Under 1000 dollars you wont find too many 3 chip cams, and they definitely do increase resolution and overall quality. Although if you want the 16:9, expect to either invest in a cam that has a wide CCD or an anamorphic converter.

Ok. Yes, it is a prosumer camera. However, in addition to the unknown number of TV segments or shows shot with the DVX100A there are also some feature films that have been shot with it. One of them featured Courtney Cox. I think it was a Sundance entry.

You are right. When you have the greenlight to use someone else's $$, (like a studio) the quality immediately jumps to true pro gear. But if I had $2000 - $3500 to budget for a camera and wanted a film look on a project I wanted to get commercially distributed in theaters, on TV, or for the rental market a good cinematographer, lighting director and a DVX100A would be my first priorities.

loki74, do you (or does anyone else here) have any experience with the Sony DSR-250?

How would you rate it compared to the Canon GL-2, XL-2 or the Panasonic AG-DVX100A or even the DVC7?

Ive never used the DSR 250 (although it has a farily decent reputation from what I understand), but I can say that the GL-2 is a pretty good cam, the guys I mentioned before that I used to work with had one of those too.

I watched the demonstrational video on the XL2 and it is very impressive. I mean, if there is a camera that pushes the upper prosumer quality level, the XL2 is it, even more so than the DVX100/100A. Especially for film. Its capable of various framerates and for 24p it can do the 2:3 or 2:3:3:2 pulldown ratios. So you can have the film on TV look, or the true film look for easy transfer to film and theatrical use. The downside is that it costs a whole lot more

As the the AG-DVC7, thats a much lower end, 1 chip camera. While it only has 1 CCD, it is a very high quality CCD. Ive read a number of reviews that show it to have extremely high, pretty much broadcast, quality video, but only in very high light environments. Once you bring it indoors, the quality drops. Also note that it cannot do the widescreen thing, so you'll need to get an anamorphic converter. But if you dont need the film look or widescreen, and youre gonna be filming outdoors on sunny days, the DVC7 doesnt sound bad at all.

Basically the DSR 250 and the XL2 will run you about the same, and they are both pretty good cams. I think that for something more film oreinted go with the XL2. for somehting more broadcast oriented, go with the DSR 250. If you cant affor those cams, the GL2 is a pretty decent camera, and if you really want to save some bucks, the DVC7 is good for outdoors.

Ive also read some pretty sparkling reviews about the DVC30... ah whatever. Just make sure you get that white balance down!

loki and Eynstyn: Thanks for the replies, although it seems that I very quickly became over my head in my own thread

The GS250 looks like a good choice, although I'm also tempted by Sony's DCR-HC90 because of its supposed low-light performance.

he he sorry about that, stupid me

Between the Sony and the Panny, looks like the Panny is WAY better. Id take having 3 Chips over 1 less lux of min illumination any day of the week. I mean, why would you even need to film below like 30 lux anyhoo? Not planning on filming black bears in a black forest on an overcast midnight are we?